91 Unleaded to be phased out. - Page 3

Nikked · 21-10-2008, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notty1978

I will never use E10 in any of my cars
I would not even put it in my mower

why?

I find it interesting that even Model T fords ran a ethenol mix back in the day.

All fuels shold have atleast 10% ethenol imo, then gradually add more to it. Cars/drivers made the switch from lead, so we can use e10.

There probally needs to be more info available, so people don't get the idea that its gonna kill engines or make suger more expensive...

BIGJB · 21-10-2008, 05:29 PM

Well there ya go.... I didn't realise they still had 91 out there lol.
Have been usin BP Ultimate for years now anyway so means nothin to me.

flappist · 21-10-2008, 05:50 PM

Where is all this ethanol going to come from?

Last year it was calculated that if all the cane and wheat in Australia was converted to ethanol and made into e10 it would provide less than 4% of the fuel used.

geckoGT · 21-10-2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

why?

There probally needs to be more info available, so people don't get the idea that its gonna kill engines or make suger more expensive...

Or give them a flat tyre, make their doors fall off, their seats fade or make them sterile like old grand poppy says.

The fact is anyone using Vortex 98 or BP Ultimate etc is already using an Ethanol blend, what do you think the additive that gives cleaner running is?

Bossxr8 · 21-10-2008, 06:02 PM

Remember a few years ago when everyone claimed Ethanol shagged your engine, and it was mostly removed from the market with the remaining sellers having to label the pumps if it had ethanol in it. How quickly times, and perceptions change. Suddenly it doesn't do what it was supposed to do 2-3 years ago.

:

geckoGT · 21-10-2008, 06:05 PM

In the early 1920's they used to smoke cigars in between stages of the Tour De France because they believed it increased their ability to breathe deep.

People learn that what was initially believed is not true in many things.

YOOT · 21-10-2008, 06:45 PM

I havn't used a drop of 91 since 2003, only 98 or Diesel for me.

FPV8U · 21-10-2008, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Or give them a flat tyre, make their doors fall off, their seats fade or make them sterile like old grand poppy says.

The fact is anyone using Vortex 98 or BP Ultimate etc is already using an Ethanol blend, what do you think the additive that gives cleaner running is?

What % are they?

geckoGT · 21-10-2008, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV8U

What % are they?

5% for most of them, freedom, liberty etc are 10%

FPV8U · 21-10-2008, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

5% for most of them, freedom, liberty etc are 10%

Thanks Gecko, interisting does that include Shell V Power Ect?

Hunter · 21-10-2008, 06:58 PM

Looks like I'll start running 95 now... I used to get absolutely terrible economy in the Falcon when I ran it on E10. On E10 I would average about 28L/100 km, on 91 I'd average about 17-18L/100 km. Same driving type, same driver (my partner rarely drives so I do 99.9% of it) same car, regularly checked tyre pressure and the same brand of E10 from the one servo.

I think ethanol is fine in engines designed to run it and I don't think it will hurt most cars but the economy is definitely worse...

Jesk · 21-10-2008, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV8U

Thanks Gecko, interisting does that include Shell V Power Ect?

V-Power 98 has NO ethanol in it at all! (v-pow racing 100oct did have some though) I know that cos i used to work at Coles Express and did the water testing, and the Ethanol blend fuels require a different type of test paste (which cost 5x as much) cos the standard paste would react to ethanol too!

but yeah yellow_festiva, since everything says that our festi's cant take ethanol blends so i wont use it, I know they can take a lotta punishment but i dont wish to tempt fate. BTW mines a 99 too!

colossus · 21-10-2008, 07:48 PM

Good, this might mean they will release something higher than 98. Japan is 100 minimum. Sick of all these cars being detuned to handle to crap fuel.

Late braker · 21-10-2008, 10:08 PM

The point to me is if E10 means higher consumption, then even though you pay 3-5 cents less at the pump, you're back there sooner than you would be on 91 so why?

Hunter · 21-10-2008, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Late braker

The point to me is if E10 means higher consumption, then even though you pay 3-5 cents less at the pump, you're back there sooner than you would be on 91 so why?

Actually its worse than that at BP - around Brisbane they have been selling E10 for the same price as 91 for a long time. Bugger paying the same price per litre to get less km that's just retarded.

**ebxr8240** · 21-10-2008, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Remember a few years ago when everyone claimed Ethanol shagged your engine, and it was mostly removed from the market with the remaining sellers having to label the pumps if it had ethanol in it. How quickly times, and perceptions change. Suddenly it doesn't do what it was supposed to do 2-3 years ago.

:

Yea mainly from the oil companies... They do have an agenda!!
Who killed the electric car ??
Yes there is some issues with seals and fuel lines..
Seals diesels / fuel petrol

Buddy 1 · 22-10-2008, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Late braker

The point to me is if E10 means higher consumption, then even though you pay 3-5 cents less at the pump, you're back there sooner than you would be on 91 so why?

As I have already stated running E10 in my Vehicle does not produce a drop in Economy compared to 91 & I can run a 98 Tune (generic) without it Pinging.

It also runs smoother & does not seem to have Less Power?

So for me it is a case of running 98 non Ethanol or 95 E10 (compare the price differance now).

And they also have a 98 Octane E10 in Brisbane.

I do agree in some vehicles it will give Less Economy however Maybe that is just a Tuning Issue?

And it should be Cheaper than 91 as it is only 90% dependant on Oil Pricing.

Lastly another good reason why is it is better for the Air we all Breathe

Mr Brooksy · 22-10-2008, 09:59 AM

Ha, this has all the signs of petrol companies removing the 'bar' that fuel prices are measured/compaired by (91RON), so that they can make a little more profit from their E10. You watch, the % gap between E10 and 95RON will decrease (ever so slightly Im sure) compaired to what it is now, because 91RON is there. But thats millions of dollars more in their pocket.

I mean, think about it for a second. WHY would they do it? Easy, more profit for them (oh and I know they need it too), because it will mean they aren't refining 5 types of basic fuels (LPG, E10, 91RON, 95RON, 98RON), and do we think, that because it will save them millions that they will pass that on to the average Joe?

Well done Shell, BP, Caltex and everyone else. Its another case of "one for me... and none for you. One for me... and none for you........"

outback_ute · 22-10-2008, 10:41 AM

Went past a Shell this morning which had the main sign with E10 signage replacing the 91 unleaded, and a green background around it where it was previously red - ie a permanent change to the sign. The next one was "normal".

I have a car from the 1960's & won't use ethanol'ed fuel in that, too much chance of a seal or hose perishing. Once all these have been changed & carbies rebuilt things would be different. Academic really anyway, I only use 98 since leaded went out as it has 10:1 compression.

Rodp · 22-10-2008, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outback_ute

I have a car from the 1960's & won't use ethanol'ed fuel in that, too much chance of a seal or hose perishing. Once all these have been changed & carbies rebuilt things would be different. Academic really anyway, I only use 98 since leaded went out as it has 10:1 compression.

You realise that you also have to be picky about 98. BP's Ultimate has Ethanol on it. My understanding is that Shell's (at the moment) doesn't.